I stumbled across this piece from the Economist through another of my favorite blog, Coming Anarchy.  It is a long read, but very interesting as it highlights the career of the most famous philosopher in the Western tradition, Socrates.

The article recounts his history from his ironic questioning (and demolishing) of opinions to the youth he attracted,to his seeming arrogance; all leading to what is considered a major sin by democratic Athens: his conviction for corrupting the youth and subsequent self administered execution by drinking hemlock.

I find Socrates a fascinating figure, so much so that I actually have the below picture, "The Death of Socrates" over my fireplace at home.  To me it represents the potential for even a form of government as highly considered as democracy to commit a dangerous act against "Truth."  It also raises the question as to whether Socrates and his ceaseless quest for "Truth" was destabilizing to the foundations of a reasonable political order.  In this sense, I, too find Socrates an ironic figure whose legacy is ambiguous and full of paradox.  He is the poster child for the nobility of questing after ultimate knowledge, but also the very real danger of such a pursuit to the establishment of the order necessary for man to function. 

As for the article in the Economist, it makes a less philosophical claim, but a more practical critique of modern American political discourse and its fundamental flaw- that it does not seek truth, but is really the stage for nothing more than gifted rhetoriticians practicing sophistry.

Of course, this raises a further question, or perhaps, a restatement of the major issue- is sophistry necessary with something akin to the Platonic "Noble Lie" as the prerequisite for order? 

Oh the complexities here of the human predicament.  What side should one come down on or should one ever come down on any side, but remain in perpetual tension?  Maybe Socrates' mistake was in deciding to be too unambiguous not only for his own safety, but for the safety of man in general.  Maybe it is this tension that should be his real lesson?

This, in my estimation, is the question man must answer to gain a complete understanding of himself as man.  It is in the realm that faith, knowledge and the eternal just might meet.